Thank you for the clarification Chris Take care
James ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chris Hofstader" <c...@hofstader.com> To: <macvisionaries@googlegroups.com> Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2009 5:50 PM Subject: Re: OSM Screen Reading was: Re: Voice Over with Apple Scripts, must get this off my chest > > If JAWS or any other Windows screen reader is speaking at the login > screen it has effectively been given privileges to run anywhere in a > Windows XP, Vista or 7 system. Rumor says that MS has stopped this > possibility in Windows 7 but I've only gossip to cite as a source and > probably won't look for more about it as it doesn't really effect me. > > JAWS can write to any place on your system with write privileges. > > About 10 lines of JAWS Script code can probably do the whole job. > > Window-Eyes and VoiceOver have much more protections around their > script facilities as they are common parts of the OS and the > architects make them as secure as possible. I don't know how orca > does it but they have excellent security as well. > > Deep in the bowels of some programs like JAWS, HAL and Zoomtext are > some really cool albeit unsecure hacks. This code, when it was really > important, was really fun to make as it required changing Windows > itself which was altogether too cool. We did such things for good, > virus hackers and other vandals use similar techniques to do their evil. > > cdh > > > On Sep 9, 2009, at 10:27 AM, James & Nash wrote: > >> >> How would we know if JFW was reading in the Desktop user area and >> what is >> it? Also, where would JFW write the file? >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Chris Hofstader" <c...@hofstader.com> >> To: <macvisionaries@googlegroups.com> >> Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2009 1:07 PM >> Subject: OSM Screen Reading was: Re: Voice Over with Apple Scripts, >> must get >> this off my chest >> >> >> >> Hi, >> >> Yes, it is indeed true that NVDA is the only Windows based screen >> access utility that has no Off Screen Model (OSM) in any traditional >> sense of the word. On GNU/Linux, orca functions without an OSM but >> mouse cursor (review cursor) mode using a simulated OSM acts kind of >> strange sometimes. VO does so well because of its tight integration >> with the OS and because the Apple accessibility API is so damn good >> that little that would require an OSM on another system is available >> to the screen reader kind of by default. >> >> Over the past year and a half or so, NVDA has matured into a solid >> little screen reader. Using MSAA, iAccessible2, some application DOM >> information and possibly some of the Sun Java accessibility stuff, it >> can create something of a tree like view of the screen contents. >> People who work closely with sighted colleagues probably should look >> for a different solution as NVDA speaks items in a logical manner and >> not in any way related to the order which items appear on screen. >> >> NVDA, though, with help and money from Mozilla, IBM, Microsoft and >> Adobe, is really growing up quickly. Because of the iAccessible2 API >> (free software from IBM), NVDA works with virtually all of OpenOffice >> and the other members of the gecko UI (Firefox for instance) family >> of programs. MSAA gives them all of the really basic stuff but, >> unlike Apple, many applications that ship with Windows use non- >> standard techniques for drawing UI and, therefore, do not work >> properly with NVDA. >> >> Mozilla keeps the boys pushing forward on Firefox andother useful free >> software. Microsoft used its money to pay the guys to support user >> interface automation (UIA) which will be its primary accessibility >> system in Windows 7) and Adobe is paying them to support its peculiar >> MSAA inplimentation that, when accessed properly, has the potential to >> do a good job on Windows at least. >> >> The OSM solutions give application vendors a bit of a freel ride. >> Before Apple added MSAA to iTunes, a JAWS user would have to buy >> scripts from Brian Hartgen (a great guy by the way) to use the program >> as Brian was able to hack around the video information and, from >> there, build something that actually worked. Thus, if Apple never >> contracted GW Micro to help with the accessibility of their Windows >> version of iTunes, Brian would still be making money selling his >> scripts and Apple could point to him as their accessibility solution >> if anyone complained. >> >> The other side of the OSM coin, though, is that capturing all of those >> loose bits and bytes can add a lot of instability to the overall >> system. Without getting into the boring details, I'll recommend that >> someone turn on JAWS on a nice XP or Vista box. Then, turn off the >> screen saver, walk away and every hour or so go to the system >> resources dialogue and see how much memory, handles and CPU usage that >> JAWS is consuming. For all intents and purposes, these values should >> be identical or at least close to identical at every visit. >> Unfortunately, you will see these numbers grow at what seems like a >> fairly regular pace (assuming no one has done anything else to the >> computer). These strange side effects slow things down, sometimes >> garble the OSM and happen for no reason anyone in or out of FS can >> figure (the FS JAWS hackers would fix this in a New York minute if >> they could actually figure out why and where it happens). >> >> >> Overall, given the power of the Apple Accessibility API, the gnome and >> Java accessibility stuff, MSAA, iAccessible2 and UIA, the OSM is >> moving rapidly toward a long awaited death. People who work on such >> things say that Windows 7 will not support a mirror driver nor any of >> the other ways screen readers build an OSM. So, with luck and >> believing MS and some of my friends (usually a reliable bunch of >> nerds) even JAWSVID.DLL will go away pretty soon. >> >> The death of the OSM probably has the GW Micro and FS guys pulling >> their hair out. Without the driver hooks, which caused the terible >> stability problems we all know and love on Windows with the top two, >> players is going to either force the mainstream application developers >> to add the appropriate accessibility information using the documented >> API or they will need to update their VPAT to say "not accessible to >> people with vision impairment on Windows 7 or newer," which kind of >> tosses a monster monkey in the fraud that has been Section 508 until >> now. >> >> Lastly, an OSM/operating system hooking solution like JAWS and WE, >> create cavernous security holes in the entire system. If my screen >> reader can speak in the desktop user space (not the desktop you >> interact with but, rather, a low level bit of Windows), it means that >> my screen reader can see almost everything and all of the keystrokes, >> mouse movememnts and clicks, and such and it can catalogue them in a >> file somewhere on your system and, when you try to use your email >> program, it can send the attachment with all of the high security >> information anywhere it cares to. So, if you want to use a screen >> reader to login to Windows, you better have some hardcore ways of >> knowing that no one wrote a little but evil JAWS script to start >> hacking your system. >> >> Scary.... >> >> Happy Hacking, >> cdh >> >> >> PS: On cup number 2... ) >> >> >> On Sep 7, 2009, at 4:31 PM, Mike Arrigo wrote: >> >>> >>> Hey Chris, it's interesting that you mention the whole off screen >>> model, actually I'm amazed that voice over does as well as it does >>> without one, I wonder if windows screen readers will ever be able to >>> move away from this approach, I think the only screen reader that >>> does >>> not have one is NVDA, and from what I've heard, it's fairly limited. >>> On Sep 7, 2009, at 9:09 AM, Chris Hofstader wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> Probably because I was once a VP at Freedom Scientific, I see the >>>> value in and strongly support adding scripting to VO. >>>> >>>> I agree that using scripts to launch applications from within a >>>> screen >>>> reader should be discouraged and I agree that some other things you >>>> mention in your email should be avoided as there are other >>>> techniques >>>> to get the same job. >>>> >>>> The fear that "VO will turn into JAWS for Macintosh," is mostly >>>> unfounded though. The reason JAWS needs scripts for virtually every >>>> application it supports is that they have an OSM and, given relative >>>> screen coordinates can tease the text drawn directly without MSAA or >>>> iAccessible2 involved. This helps make the completely inaccessible >>>> into something that is marginally and sometimes very accessible. >>>> >>>> VO has no OSM. Even with the new scripting facility, it cannot >>>> correct the owner drawn interfaces (I've been trying to get VO and >>>> MacSpeech Dictate to talk and its a hemorrhoid of a project). What >>>> AppleScript gives us is the ability to add features to a combination >>>> of programs where the authors did a decent job of making their >>>> software accessible but the user would benefit from some very deep >>>> contextual information that would be very difficult for a generic >>>> API >>>> to deliver. >>>> >>>> I read a post (I think on this list) about reading table headers in >>>> the iWork spreadsheet. the post said it works great if the headers >>>> are on the top row but starts to fail if they are elsewhere. >>>> >>>> So, why not write a script that allows multiple tables, each with >>>> their own headings to exist in a single spreadsheet? No API is >>>> smart >>>> enough to do this but, I would think that a script driven >>>> communication system between VO and the worksheet could do it in a >>>> fairly straight forward manner. This script could also "mangle" the >>>> worksheet file name in a manner that is unique so, if you reload the >>>> same document, your headers will be there for you. Even cooler, if >>>> you open a spreadsheet with a very similar name (Sales Report >>>> 1/1/2009, Sales Report 2/1/2009, etc.) they will probably have the >>>> same format and the user can be offered the opportunity to load last >>>> month's headers. >>>> >>>> There are lots of ideas that can be expressed in scripts that a >>>> generic screen reader cannot understand. >>>> >>>> Happy Curt Flood Day, >>>> cdh >>>> On Sep 7, 2009, at 8:52 AM, Jes Smith wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Hi all. >>>>> >>>>> I am greatly concerned that voice over now has support for >>>>> scripting. >>>>> Especially now that you can make voice over launch an application >>>>> with >>>>> a single script. I'm not talking about glancing at the time or >>>>> seeing >>>>> how many unread messages you have in mail. I'm talking about >>>>> opening >>>>> up apps like mail or Safari from within Voice OVer. I am concerned >>>>> that voice over is starting to become a bit like Jaws, and that if >>>>> we >>>>> don't get a grip on it now, voice over will become Jaws for >>>>> Macintosh. >>>>> I, like Mike Arrigo, don't feel that launching apps is something >>>>> that >>>>> should be implemented in a screen reader. Also, I fear that the use >>>>> of >>>>> apple scripts will replace the responsibility of an application >>>>> developer to make their application accessible right out of the >>>>> box. >>>>> On the Windows side, if something isn't accessible with Jaws, you >>>>> just >>>>> download scripts for it. What if you go to another person's >>>>> computer >>>>> and they don't have the scripts for the app you are trying to use? >>>>> It's my belief that a certain article from the NFB prompted this >>>>> scripting support. Folks, the thing I like about voice over is that >>>>> it >>>>> gives the blind user the same conceptual layout and information as >>>>> it >>>>> appears on the screen to a sighted user. No other screen reader >>>>> does >>>>> this, and we should keep voice over as a screen reader, and let it >>>>> be. >>>>> If we don't, eventually, when we try and contact an Apple >>>>> developer, >>>>> they will either ignore us, or will say, "Well, just download the >>>>> scripts for my application and you will have access." >>>>> Any thoughts? If someone disagrees with me, I'd love to hear your >>>>> arguments, not so that I can persuade you to agree with me, but so >>>>> that I can have a new perspective. >>>>> >>>>> Jes >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>> >>> >>>> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MacVisionaries" group. To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
